Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is it just me who doesn't care about or want cell chip in AW2?
- Thread starter Gentsuperman
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No way battery tech can support a cellular radio with anything approaching reasonable life.
One thing that allows me to feel comfortable about using the watch for my basic communications is knowing I have the phone nearby if I need to do something more complicated (send a web link or photo, or type an email, and do it all silently).
Does that make sense?
When I leave the house without the phone, it's usually just to the corner store, and I don't need the phone anyway. For longer excursions, if I were to choose between only the watch or only the phone, I'll take the phone.
I just don't think the size of the watch interface allows it to be a good standalone device. But, it's an excellent accessory. It's like the peanut butter to the chocolate iPhone.
Does that make sense?
When I leave the house without the phone, it's usually just to the corner store, and I don't need the phone anyway. For longer excursions, if I were to choose between only the watch or only the phone, I'll take the phone.
I just don't think the size of the watch interface allows it to be a good standalone device. But, it's an excellent accessory. It's like the peanut butter to the chocolate iPhone.
Probably the same people that said the iPhone doesn't need mms back in the day
The watch not having cellular data connectivity, is not because Apple feels you don’t need it. It is because they follow “design thinking” paradigm, in which they iterate product features.
So you first launch a “bike”, then a “motorcycle” and eventually the “car”.
If you are buying this Apple Watch right now, you have bought the bike.
Let’s just put that on the table. Because you won’t hear it from the Apple marketing dept, since their job is to extract max price from whatever the product team offers for each launch.
Does a watch need this connectivity, yes. Because that is where this product has real value. "Watch" is merely an analogy to ease the customer in and provide a frame of reference for the limited connectivity (NO GPS, no data) and wrist size. You are looking at the early stages of the new smartphone. It will equally well be a "necklace" or a "pocket watch". Its a minaturization of the iphone, which will become redundant, old fashioned.
In a decade, you will view these large glass and metal slabs, which we use right now, as outdated.
But what's for sale right now, is a public beta with limited functionality. So they can iterate. At great cost to you.
Nice racket, if you can pull it off. And they do.
So you first launch a “bike”, then a “motorcycle” and eventually the “car”.
If you are buying this Apple Watch right now, you have bought the bike.
Let’s just put that on the table. Because you won’t hear it from the Apple marketing dept, since their job is to extract max price from whatever the product team offers for each launch.
Does a watch need this connectivity, yes. Because that is where this product has real value. "Watch" is merely an analogy to ease the customer in and provide a frame of reference for the limited connectivity (NO GPS, no data) and wrist size. You are looking at the early stages of the new smartphone. It will equally well be a "necklace" or a "pocket watch". Its a minaturization of the iphone, which will become redundant, old fashioned.
In a decade, you will view these large glass and metal slabs, which we use right now, as outdated.
But what's for sale right now, is a public beta with limited functionality. So they can iterate. At great cost to you.
Nice racket, if you can pull it off. And they do.
So by this logic, nobody should have bought an iPod in 2001 or a Ford Model T in 1908? Because they were saving the touch screen and airbags until later?
I would definitely like to have mobile data/voice in the next AW, though the lack of which wouldn't be a deal-killer.
Right now I am pretty much tethered to my phone. If I leave home without it it is a big deal (to me). Same for my wife. I am cut-off, and since I am often on call that could be a problem.
Sans phone, having even basic connectivity to the outside world would be a plus. As for the "second phone number thing" I really don't think Apple would handle it without a solution to that issue (e.g., when out of wifi range of iPhone AW forwards all calls and texts to AW via cell network).
Mike
Right now I am pretty much tethered to my phone. If I leave home without it it is a big deal (to me). Same for my wife. I am cut-off, and since I am often on call that could be a problem.
Sans phone, having even basic connectivity to the outside world would be a plus. As for the "second phone number thing" I really don't think Apple would handle it without a solution to that issue (e.g., when out of wifi range of iPhone AW forwards all calls and texts to AW via cell network).
Mike
You sound like a non-AW owner who don't have a realistic expectation of how the AW works. You're implying they're purposely saving future iterations of the AW so it can replace the iPhone but there's currently no good way to type out long texts (one letter at a time handwriting doesn't count) and surf the Internet on the AW. While it's true they don't put all their eggs in one basket, they're not deliberately holding back major functionalities not supported by current technology.
You dont get what I said. I didnt say "holding back" - you did. And I didnt "imply" anything - you misinferred.
What I said is: they iterate progressively, from simple barebones product to complex one. That's the "design thinking" approach. Said approach also means that anyone who buys the early commercial product is basically an open beta customer.
And yes, this is where the smartphone goes next. Note that barely a decade ago the idea of a smartphone with no hardware keyboard would have been ludicrous. But LCD's got a lot better and a lot more durable and processing power increases made predictive text better than actually typing every letter.
Indeed Apple is holding back from what current technology can do. Go have a look at the galaxy Gear S. Why do they hold back? Most likely because battery life is a challenge at the moment once you stick on all the radios. But also because if they go iteratively they can make a better smartwatch in the end, by using the learnings from user habits and reactions alone the way. And not least, because they limit expectations so that each iteration delivers on the promise very well, even if a simple promise. That's a way to ensure you keep those gross margins high.
Yes, they hold back from what is possible technologically. Dont look at it as "conspiracy" - its very specific approach to iterative mass-market product development. Semi-fast following, if you want pin the tail on the donkey.
I will simply say that you didnt understand what I wrote. Try reviewing it again. I didnt say there are no reasons to buy it. I said it's an open beta. Full connectivity and radios is obviously in the roadmap. You only have to look at the Galaxy Gear S to get where this goes. Its also an open beta in a way, because it clearly isnt quite fully executed. But it has all the pieces there. Different kind of "open beta".
That BTW is actually symptomatic of the difference in Samsung vs Apple in consumer devices at least. Samsung will just launch the endgame product and see if it sticks. Apple makes a roadmap and iterates to the endgame, making money along the way by marketing the hell out of each step forward. But basically most of the core underlying product that will be the Apple Watch 3, Samsung launched that like in 2014.
But by positioning this early thing a "watch" Apple can manage expectations and sell it for a healthy price. By iteration #3, you'll find that they are telling you you no longer need a phone. Note BTW they already anticipated that smartphone slab of glass as we know it has topped out in advancement and they needed to move to new ground in order to maintain margins. So the Iphone will get ever more expensive and become more need, and this watch will evolve gradually to take over volume.
Really, a standalone smartwatch, properly executed, can do most of what a smartphone as we know it does. So it "mp3's" the smartphone. Apple has to be out front here, and that is what they are doing - iteratively.
So for sure, its going to have full connectivity. It must. That's where this train is heading.
Its better you think about what's actually going on underneath in the business and product development strategy, instead of looking for red herring to take offence about.
Last edited:
I just bought a roll of toilet paper and read they are working on a softer version. Does that mean I'm a beta tester with every wipe?
NEWS FLASH: Almost all consumer produces are alway being improved and changed from year to year or generation to generation.
This is not your father's Oldsmobile.So you agree that what's possible technologically and having a good user experience are two different things. Putting something novel in at the expense of a good user experience isn't Apple's style (such as GPS if the battery will drain in 5 minutes). Your previous post made it sound like their only motivation is to "extract max price from whatever the product team offers for each launch" and so your post came across incorrectly.
You might have learned by now to stop putting words in other people's mouth?
No I don't "agree" anything.
I said this is the approach. Iterate. Make sure you make it possible commercially by managing expectations carefully and hyping what you actually deliver well to maxing out revenue and margins. So the Marketing approach and the iterative design go hand in hand. Each one is "the best ever" and indeed it is, except it could have been better but choice is taken to go step by step. It's not a crime, its an approach.
I have a Gear S that I find more satisfying than a tethered watch would be. So that's my take on it. But then again I am one who thinks the smartphone category is stale and ready for rethinking and even downsizing.
But under the concept of watch ("bike") there is plenty of room to satisfy customers who want something better than a Fitbit and more connected than a fine Jewelry watch.
However this is not to say a cellular radio is pointless - I mean if it was just a tethered watch as endgame, Apple would NOT have gotten into this product category. This device is the new "iphone" - make no mistake.
Sure, but they still need to figure out a practical way to type out long messages and surf the Internet on something as small as a watch. It's not always appropriate to dictate messages or carry a phone conversation on the watch, nor is it practical to do Internet on it.
Apple has never minded cannibalizing their products, as long as it's their own products that are doing the cannibalizing.
A cell chip would be a great addition for those who want to use AW for running and not bring their phones. I never run outdoors without a phone primarily for safety/emergency situations, and I'd be tempted to use an AW over my Garmin for non-training runs or races if I had the ability to make calls.
Now we get to the heart of the matter - who is "they"? Everybody? Not really. Especially as everyone has different devices and these devices are all communication. Many people need to be connnected all the time, but dont need full computing capabilty all the time.
I experimented with the Gear S for 3 months straight and actually the only time I needed this capability of a full phone was when on vacation. But in day to day life, actually you could strip it away. Most of the apps, and the "surfing" aka time wasting.
What I couldnt strip away though was the need to receive a phone call or a text message at all times.
With full connnectivity and a few key apps on a smartwatch, basically you have "mp3'd" the smartphone.
That is the real power of this thing: the "watch" idea is just a framework to familiarize you with the idea of having wearable smartdevice this thing on your person. But it is an appetiser, not the main course.
Perhaps you're content enough with a watch with cellular capability to leave your phone at home, but as someone who spends the vast majority of the time on iPhone in Safari, an AW with cellular isn't going to do it. I'd imagine most people won't be satisfied with such a small screen for internet access. Your Gear S doesn't even have a solution to the problem when it's not always appropriate to dictate long messages in public or carry a phone conversation on the watch.
Last edited:
"...Perhaps you're content enough with a watch with cellular capability to leave your phone at home..."
No, it was my phone. My only phone. I didt leave anything at home - in fact I couldnt forget my phone - it was always on my wrist ;-)
Bluetooth headset exists, you know. No doubt you have heard of them. Which of course connect to devices that have bluetooth connectivity. Such as that one.
Dictating long messages? Autocomplete and swiping is your friend.
In my use case, the real barrier was a tiny handful of apps, that I used intensely. These are actually on IOS, but were not in Tizen.
Also a surprising thing that I missed was having a camera with me at all times.
Otherwise, real barrier on these devices at the moment is battery life and not much more. The 3G radio is suprisingly lean in power use, but 4G isnt. Bluetooth is not bad but could be better. Wifi is a pig. Those are the main barriers. Most of the rest are solved.
So this is the state of affairs. Once they solve the power consumption issue, especially on 4G, basically a huge swath of people who might have a smartphone - wont. I suspect some of the shift will be generational. You will get "natives" - kids who have never owned this hunk of glass, think voice interaction and predictive assistance are standard and "normal" - and all of a sudden that will be the shift in momentum.
This goes faster than you think - there are already kids who think an LCD screen that you cannot touch-interact or swipe with is silly and outdated. And website interaction and menus and text are already being "iconised" to reflect a shift from typing-intensive users, to finger-swipers.
So personally I find the concept of "dont care of want a cell chip" funny. Its like our parents used to sit around wondering why we need a phone our pocket. Now some among us wondering "why would anybody want a phone on their wrist?". That's generational changes...
No, it was my phone. My only phone. I didt leave anything at home - in fact I couldnt forget my phone - it was always on my wrist ;-)
Bluetooth headset exists, you know. No doubt you have heard of them. Which of course connect to devices that have bluetooth connectivity. Such as that one.
Dictating long messages? Autocomplete and swiping is your friend.
In my use case, the real barrier was a tiny handful of apps, that I used intensely. These are actually on IOS, but were not in Tizen.
Also a surprising thing that I missed was having a camera with me at all times.
Otherwise, real barrier on these devices at the moment is battery life and not much more. The 3G radio is suprisingly lean in power use, but 4G isnt. Bluetooth is not bad but could be better. Wifi is a pig. Those are the main barriers. Most of the rest are solved.
So this is the state of affairs. Once they solve the power consumption issue, especially on 4G, basically a huge swath of people who might have a smartphone - wont. I suspect some of the shift will be generational. You will get "natives" - kids who have never owned this hunk of glass, think voice interaction and predictive assistance are standard and "normal" - and all of a sudden that will be the shift in momentum.
This goes faster than you think - there are already kids who think an LCD screen that you cannot touch-interact or swipe with is silly and outdated. And website interaction and menus and text are already being "iconised" to reflect a shift from typing-intensive users, to finger-swipers.
So personally I find the concept of "dont care of want a cell chip" funny. Its like our parents used to sit around wondering why we need a phone our pocket. Now some among us wondering "why would anybody want a phone on their wrist?". That's generational changes...
Bluetooth headsets are a fad that died out like 10 years ago and nobody wears them 24/7 lest they want to look like a tool.
I don't know how swiping works on the Gear S if there is such a thing. Autocomplete can't really be done from scratch if you want to avoid dictating. One letter at a time handwriting seems too tedious for long messages.
And there's still no good substitute for accessing the Internet.
Psst, seen this "fad" here:
Fad, yes - you better ring somebody in Cupertino and get this pulled from the shelves:
So yeah, taking calls is a solved problem. And so is texting. Apps is what Apple wants you to use - not the internet.
If we can now get back to the point? The real question is how long before this product line builds up to cellular connectivity, not whether it is wanted.
Fad, yes - you better ring somebody in Cupertino and get this pulled from the shelves:
http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MHBE2AM/A/powerbeats2-wireless-earphones-black
Highlights
Easily pairs within 30 feet of your iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, or Bluetooth-enabled iPod
Premium sound performance
Rechargeable six-hour battery
Sweat and water resistant
No-slip grip in-line microphone and remote for calls
Lighter, smaller, and with a flexible ear hook
More freedom
From the street to the court, Powerbeats2 Wireless gives you the freedom to take your workout anywhere. Wireless Bluetooth lets you connect up to 30 feet from your iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, or Bluetooth-enabled iPod—so you can move freely and stay focused on your workout. A rechargeable battery with 6-hour playback gives you the power to endure to the end. If you’re on empty, a 15-minute quick charge delivers an extra hour of non-stop playback.
Highlights
Easily pairs within 30 feet of your iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, or Bluetooth-enabled iPod
Premium sound performance
Rechargeable six-hour battery
Sweat and water resistant
No-slip grip in-line microphone and remote for calls
Lighter, smaller, and with a flexible ear hook
More freedom
From the street to the court, Powerbeats2 Wireless gives you the freedom to take your workout anywhere. Wireless Bluetooth lets you connect up to 30 feet from your iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, or Bluetooth-enabled iPod—so you can move freely and stay focused on your workout. A rechargeable battery with 6-hour playback gives you the power to endure to the end. If you’re on empty, a 15-minute quick charge delivers an extra hour of non-stop playback.
So yeah, taking calls is a solved problem. And so is texting. Apps is what Apple wants you to use - not the internet.
If we can now get back to the point? The real question is how long before this product line builds up to cellular connectivity, not whether it is wanted.
Last edited:
That doesn't change the fact that bluetooth headsets are a fad that basically died out several years ago, or at least they're not as popular as they used to be. Fad doesn't mean it's no longer sold, only not as popular.
Uh....huh...really......:
http://qz.com/745108/wireless-headphone-sales-just-hit-a-tipping-point/
UNPLUG
https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/...-headphone-sales-surpass-non-bluetooth-sales/
http://qz.com/745108/wireless-headphone-sales-just-hit-a-tipping-point/
UNPLUG
Wireless headphones just overtook traditional headphones in sales
Wireless headphones outsold non-bluetooth headphones for the first time ever in the first half of 2016, according to consumer research firm NPD Group.
Bluetooth headphones have been around for awhile, but only recently started becoming more popular. One catalyst could be bluetooth low energy, a network that consumes less battery power than traditional bluetooth connections. Wireless headphones themselves have gotten cheaper too—30% of bluetooth headphones sold in the first half of 2016 cost $50 or less, compared with 16% in the first half of 2015.
As wearables become more commonplace, wired headphones may also become less so. (After all, it would be annoying to plug your headphones into your Apple Watch.) Apple is also reportedly considering eliminating the headphone jack from the next iPhone in favor of proprietary wireless headphones, which could further push overall bluetooth adoption.
Wireless headphones outsold non-bluetooth headphones for the first time ever in the first half of 2016, according to consumer research firm NPD Group.
Bluetooth headphones have been around for awhile, but only recently started becoming more popular. One catalyst could be bluetooth low energy, a network that consumes less battery power than traditional bluetooth connections. Wireless headphones themselves have gotten cheaper too—30% of bluetooth headphones sold in the first half of 2016 cost $50 or less, compared with 16% in the first half of 2015.
As wearables become more commonplace, wired headphones may also become less so. (After all, it would be annoying to plug your headphones into your Apple Watch.) Apple is also reportedly considering eliminating the headphone jack from the next iPhone in favor of proprietary wireless headphones, which could further push overall bluetooth adoption.
https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/...-headphone-sales-surpass-non-bluetooth-sales/
Bluetooth headphones account for 54 percent of U.S. dollar sales in the category, according to NPD
Port Washington, NY, July 28, 2016 – According to The NPD Group's Retail Tracking Service, Bluetooth headphone revenue overtook non-Bluetooth for the first time in June accounting for 54 percent of headphone dollar sales and 17 percent of unit sales in the U.S.
While the headphone category saw a 7 percent year-over-year increase in dollar sales for the first half of 2016, Bluetooth headphones saw double-digit growth with a 42 percent year-over-year increase in dollar sales for the first half of the year.
Beats and LG have led the Bluetooth headphone market throughout the first half of the year, accounting for approximately 65 percent of dollar sales. The following brands are the top five in the industry in Bluetooth headphone sales:
Port Washington, NY, July 28, 2016 – According to The NPD Group's Retail Tracking Service, Bluetooth headphone revenue overtook non-Bluetooth for the first time in June accounting for 54 percent of headphone dollar sales and 17 percent of unit sales in the U.S.
While the headphone category saw a 7 percent year-over-year increase in dollar sales for the first half of 2016, Bluetooth headphones saw double-digit growth with a 42 percent year-over-year increase in dollar sales for the first half of the year.
Beats and LG have led the Bluetooth headphone market throughout the first half of the year, accounting for approximately 65 percent of dollar sales. The following brands are the top five in the industry in Bluetooth headphone sales:
Uh....huh...really......:
http://qz.com/745108/wireless-headphone-sales-just-hit-a-tipping-point/
UNPLUG
Wireless headphones just overtook traditional headphones in sales
Wireless headphones outsold non-bluetooth headphones for the first time ever in the first half of 2016, according to consumer research firm NPD Group.
Bluetooth headphones have been around for awhile, but only recently started becoming more popular. One catalyst could be bluetooth low energy, a network that consumes less battery power than traditional bluetooth connections. Wireless headphones themselves have gotten cheaper too—30% of bluetooth headphones sold in the first half of 2016 cost $50 or less, compared with 16% in the first half of 2015.
As wearables become more commonplace, wired headphones may also become less so. (After all, it would be annoying to plug your headphones into your Apple Watch.) Apple is also reportedly considering eliminating the headphone jack from the next iPhone in favor of proprietary wireless headphones, which could further push overall bluetooth adoption.
https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/...-headphone-sales-surpass-non-bluetooth-sales/
Bluetooth headphones account for 54 percent of U.S. dollar sales in the category, according to NPD
Port Washington, NY, July 28, 2016 – According to The NPD Group's Retail Tracking Service, Bluetooth headphone revenue overtook non-Bluetooth for the first time in June accounting for 54 percent of headphone dollar sales and 17 percent of unit sales in the U.S.
While the headphone category saw a 7 percent year-over-year increase in dollar sales for the first half of 2016, Bluetooth headphones saw double-digit growth with a 42 percent year-over-year increase in dollar sales for the first half of the year.
Beats and LG have led the Bluetooth headphone market throughout the first half of the year, accounting for approximately 65 percent of dollar sales. The following brands are the top five in the industry in Bluetooth headphone sales:
That's headphones for listening to music. I'm talking about behind-the-ear bluetooth headsets (like Jawbone) primarily for carrying a phone conversation via Bluetooth. Nobody is going to wear those huge headphones 24/7 just so they can respond to a phone call on the watch.